Johnson and Johnson lawsuit
Johnson & Johnson (J&J), the global healthcare giant, is currently embroiled in one of the largest product liability lawsuits in UK history. Around 3,000 claimants have filed suit alleging that J&J’s talcum powder products, marketed primarily as baby powder, were contaminated with asbestos and caused serious cancers including ovarian cancer and mesothelioma. This mounting legal battle shines a spotlight on decades of controversy regarding the safety of talc-based powders and corporate accountability.
The allegations claim that J&J knew or should have known about asbestos contamination in its talcum powder as early as the 1960s. Internal documents and scientific studies reportedly indicated the presence of carcinogenic asbestos fibers in the powder, yet the company allegedly continued to market the products as safe, pure, and free from harmful substances. Claimants argue that J&J suppressed evidence, failed to warn consumers, and lobbied regulatory agencies to prevent safety warnings from being issued.
The claims focus on products sold in the UK by J&J and its subsidiary Kenvue UK — a business unit spun off from the parent company in 2023, now responsible for non-North American talc litigation. The plaintiffs seek substantial compensation, collectively demanding damages in the hundreds of millions of pounds. The litigation process is expected to be prolonged and closely watched, with potentially far-reaching consequences for consumer product regulation and multinational corporate practices.
J&J ceased sales of talc-based baby powder in the UK in 2023, shifting to cornstarch-based products marketed as safer alternatives. However, similar lawsuits have already caused major financial and reputational damage to the company in the United States. There, tens of thousands of individual and class-action suits over talc and asbestos have resulted in significant settlements. Notably, a 2025 verdict awarded $966 million to a mesothelioma patient who successfully proved that J&J’s product caused her terminal illness.
The UK suits lay bare broader concerns about how long J&J allegedly prioritized profits over consumer health, and whether regulatory bodies were misled or inadequately vigilant. This case follows growing global scrutiny of talc products and raises critical questions about transparency, legal accountability, and product safety standards worldwide.
For consumers, the ongoing suits serve as a reminder to remain vigilant about product ingredients and to demand corporate responsibility. For J&J, the outcome may define the future trajectory of one of its flagship brands and potentially reshape legal and regulatory landscapes for personal care products.
As the case proceeds, it will be vital to watch how courts weigh the scientific evidence, internal corporate communications, and regulatory responses. The verdict may influence similar litigation globally, emphasizing that no matter how large a corporation is, public health concerns must come first.
This lawsuit is a landmark moment for victim advocacy, corporate ethics, and consumer protection, and it is likely to be a defining chapter in Johnson & Johnson’s storied corporate history in the UK and beyond. This article summarizes the key facts and implications of the Johnson & Johnson UK talcum powder lawsuit based on the latest information available as of October 2025
About the Author
